SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

[timbad]

Another upper-Market development. This time at 2175 Market (currently a 76 Station): ...

thanks as always '77... something I have been wondering about for a little while that this just reminded me of... I've noticed that quite a few development sites in the City are replacing gas stations. this is not an issue for me, but for those that drive out there, is there any sense that gas stations are becoming less convenient to find?

[minesweeper]

Nice find! I like the wood finishes, which help distinguish an otherwise fairly mundane design.

It seems like it will be the tallest building in the area, which might draw some opposition, but hopefully the higher density will win out.

[1977]

And since we're on the Upper Market tip...

Here's an article and nice overview of the the projects in the area:

Construction should start soon at two other sites. Demolition permits were pulled in March for 2200 Market Street at Sanchez. A new 22-unit, 55-foot-high building is planned for the corner lot where the now-closed Leticia's restaurant stands.

Down the street at the site of a former gas station at 1998 Market Street at Buchanan a groundbreaking for the 115-unit, 85-foot building should occur by the middle of June. Approved back in 2008, the development languished due to a lack of financing.

"Finally banks are back in business after a three-year hiatus," said developer Brian Spiers. "It is just a great area. We should build housing along our most busy thoroughfare."

Rather than have 17 below market units on the site, Spiers sought city approval last December to construct 23 units of affordable housing at the corner lot he owns at Market and Franklin streets. Both projects will start construction at the same time, and Spiers hopes to have them completed within 18 months.


Article and source via sf.curbed.com: http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=67752

[fflint]

2175 looks awesome, and is two blocks from my home. I'm officially located in the middle of all the new construction in Upper Market--Dolores and 15th, Dolores and Market, Market and 15th....

[peanut gallery]

^Fantastic! You know that means we will expect photo updates from you on all these projects. :)

I like the corner and the way they've split 2175 into two buildings. I hope all that white area isn't just stucco. The material choice for those areas will make or break the look of this one for me.

[easy as pie]

wow, that bay area reporter article is an excellent summary of recent developments and some great timelines. plus that note about the gold's gym building getting a couple more floors is a genuine scoop.

[Cory]

thanks as always '77... something I have been wondering about for a little while that this just reminded me of... I've noticed that quite a few development sites in the City are replacing gas stations. this is not an issue for me, but for those that drive out there, is there any sense that gas stations are becoming less convenient to find?

Even in SF, I don't think we're to that point yet. It all sounds very idealistic but there will always be gas stations. Gas stations along transit-rich Market is some of the most ironic uses of land I can think of anyway.

[San Frangelino]

Is this still the design for 2200 Market Street ?

From Socketsite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/04/2200_market_the_proposed_designs.html):
http://www.socketsite.com/2200%20Market%20Rendering.jpg

[easy as pie]

from what i can tell, that's the design.

btw, the site for this one has been under prep and excavation for the past month or so: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/05/15/infill_du_jour_midrise_lands_on_lower_nob_hill_parking_lot.php

the bush street midrise (here between larkin and polk (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=1537+Pine+Street,+San+Francisco,+CA&hl=en&ll=37.78976,-122.41941&spn=0.004867,0.013078&sll=37.789465,-122.422057&layer=c&cbp=13,201.15,,0,-0.95&cbll=37.789732,-122.419656&gl=us&hnear=1537+Pine+St,+San+Francisco,+California+94109&t=h&panoid=LBF6lxtA21VAkLwZKmwZ2Q&z=17)) is getting started with cladding and fenestration, i'll cruise by for a photo later today. looks great so far. bizarrely, i can't find any listing anywhere for it, which makes me think that it's tldc-built or something like that. a pipeline report from 2007 shows 1465 being entitled for 37 units and 1461 being entitled for 15 more units - this will come with replacement rate commercial, so ~5000sqf of grade-level commercial space. i wish i could find a rendering, but i'm too lazy to dig around anymore. egress looks like it's off the lane too, which is nice, especially since it's next to a school.

this is the big one though, my scoop for the week these three lots (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=1537+Pine+Street,+San+Francisco,+CA&hl=en&ll=37.789565,-122.420965&spn=0.004833,0.013078&sll=37.789465,-122.422057&layer=c&cbp=13,182.5,,0,3.81&cbll=37.789545,-122.421089&gl=us&hnear=1537+Pine+St,+San+Francisco,+California+94109&t=h&z=17&panoid=WEFmaIRjw8NKcwBwLXsRyA) are being proposed as the site for 120 units over 10 floors, with grade-level retail and egress on the austin street laneway side. one of my new fave projects and it's being built by mega-money developer trumark. hoohoo.
http://i.imgur.com/EiHkr.jpg?1

[1977]

from what i can tell, that's the design.

btw, the site for this one has been under prep and excavation for the past month or so: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/05/15/infill_du_jour_midrise_lands_on_lower_nob_hill_parking_lot.php

the bush street midrise (here between larkin and polk (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=1537+Pine+Street,+San+Francisco,+CA&hl=en&ll=37.78976,-122.41941&spn=0.004867,0.013078&sll=37.789465,-122.422057&layer=c&cbp=13,201.15,,0,-0.95&cbll=37.789732,-122.419656&gl=us&hnear=1537+Pine+St,+San+Francisco,+California+94109&t=h&panoid=LBF6lxtA21VAkLwZKmwZ2Q&z=17)) is getting started with cladding and fenestration, i'll cruise by for a photo later today. looks great so far. bizarrely, i can't find any listing anywhere for it, which makes me think that it's tldc-built or something like that. a pipeline report from 2007 shows 1465 being entitled for 37 units and 1461 being entitled for 15 more units - this will come with replacement rate commercial, so ~5000sqf of grade-level commercial space. i wish i could find a rendering, but i'm too lazy to dig around anymore. egress looks like it's off the lane too, which is nice, especially since it's next to a school.

this is the big one though, my scoop for the week these three lots (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=1537+Pine+Street,+San+Francisco,+CA&hl=en&ll=37.789565,-122.420965&spn=0.004833,0.013078&sll=37.789465,-122.422057&layer=c&cbp=13,182.5,,0,3.81&cbll=37.789545,-122.421089&gl=us&hnear=1537+Pine+St,+San+Francisco,+California+94109&t=h&z=17&panoid=WEFmaIRjw8NKcwBwLXsRyA) are being proposed as the site for 120 units over 10 floors, with grade-level retail and egress on the austin street laneway side. one of my new fave projects and it's being built by mega-money developer trumark. hoohoo.
http://i.imgur.com/EiHkr.jpg?1

Great find and info! Thanks. I really like the design as well, and am happy to see Grubstake won't be leveled. ha.

Btw, here's an article about the project (1533 Pine St) from the SF Business Times:

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/06/01/trumark-hits-san-francisco.html

Not sure how up to date this is, but here's a website for 1080 Sutter: http://www.1080sutter.com/

[easy as pie]

the last rendering for 1080 sutter
http://i.imgur.com/E0lwp.jpg

[Jerry of San Fran]

Walked by June 5th and got this updated photo.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8011/7346273544_63a724ebd2_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/7346273544/)

[timbad]

Walked by June 5th and got this updated photo.


thanks Jerry! I was by there a couple weeks ago, and for what will be such a large building, it seems that it will crowd the not-very-wide sidewalk. we'll have to see how it turns out and how the corner feels.

[mt_climber13]

333 Harrison St.

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/IMG_0298.jpg

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/IMG_0295.jpg

25 Essex St.

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/IMG_0294.jpg

Hotel in Mission Bay on 2nd st. right next to the Ballpark

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/IMG_0316.jpg

[peanut gallery]

Nice! That building on Essex is going to look great. Yet another non-market rate housing development that will look better than a lot of similarly-sized market-rate housing.

BTW: that last one on Second (behind MoMo's) is condos, not a hotel.

[Jerry of San Fran]

333 Harrison St.

Wakamesalad - thanks for the updates. The last picture I found to be very funny. A port-a-pottie in evey unit?

[easy as pie]

man, trinity plaza really wasn't joking - there's like zero setback there, nuts.

[mt_climber13]

I came across this at Studios Architecture's website- the 38 story Sailor's Union Residential Tower (across the street from ORH). This is the first I have heard of such a concept and the web site is quite vague. I really like tower, though!

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/ScreenShot2012-06-07at72432PM.png

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/ScreenShot2012-06-07at72550PM.png

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/ScreenShot2012-06-07at72558PM.png

Link: http://www.studios.com/projects/sailors_union_residential_tower

[easy as pie]

the thing about sf is that it's a real shame that much more of it wasn't built out long ago, like the ternderloin. it's the difference between a beautiful street wall and sidewalks interrupted every 10 meters by driveways.

[viewguysf]

the thing about sf is that it's a real shame that much more of it wasn't built out long ago, like the ternderloin. it's the difference between a beautiful street wall and sidewalks interrupted every 10 meters by driveways.

The Tenderloin was built out long ago, much of it just like you see it today. It has a considerable amount of interesting architecture that is quite admirable and will most likely never become a highrise district. I, for one, am content with that.

[1977]

The new plaza at 303 Second looks pretty nice. Click here (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/06/kilroy-put-some-jazz-into-soma-plaza.html?s=image_gallery) for photos.

The plaza at 303 Second St. has received a $10 million facelift and a new 18,000 pound centerpiece.
Kilroy Realty Corp. this week unveiled its fresh, sunny new plaza at 303 Second St. With live soul music playing in the background office tenants and SoMa residents snacked on strawberry lemonade and gourmet popsicles and got a special visit from Mayor Edwin Lee, who thanked Kilroy for its contribution to public art: a 18,000 pound, 75 feet long by 25 feet high bronze sculpture created by the nationally acclaimed young American artist Jon Krawczyk.....
Source and article: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/06/kilroy-put-some-jazz-into-soma-plaza.html?page=all

[1977]

I came across this at Studios Architecture's website- the 38 story Sailor's Union Residential Tower (across the street from ORH). This is the first I have heard of such a concept and the web site is quite vague. I really like tower, though!

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/ScreenShot2012-06-07at72432PM.png

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/ScreenShot2012-06-07at72550PM.png

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/ScreenShot2012-06-07at72558PM.png

Link: http://www.studios.com/projects/sailors_union_residential_tower

Unfortunately, I think these are really old renderings and plans. You can tell by the height of One Rincon Hill. Cool find though! I hadn't seen this proposal before.

[1977]

Great set of photos of the almost finished PUC building in Civic Center:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/d-arch/7164749079/

[viewguysf]

The new plaza at 303 Second looks pretty nice. Click here (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/06/kilroy-put-some-jazz-into-soma-plaza.html?s=image_gallery) for photos.


Source and article: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/06/kilroy-put-some-jazz-into-soma-plaza.html?page=all

Nice improvement! Thanks for sharing 1977.

[viewguysf]

Great set of photos of the almost finished PUC building in Civic Center:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/d-arch/7164749079/

Sorry to clutter up the thread, but WOW/BOMB! :tup:

[peanut gallery]

PUC - the interior is spectacular! What a gem.

New Plaza @ 303 Second - That always has lots of people at lunchtime and I'd say they did a nice job making it look more inviting and cooler (literally). Believe it or not, that plaza is usually quite warm at midday and a little respite from the sun is often welcome.

Unfortunately, I think these are really old renderings and plans. You can tell by the height of One Rincon Hill.

I noticed that as well. Still, it's an interesting rendering. I like the upper floors, especially the treatment on the First St. face. Not a fan of the podium though. While I like the nod to the existing building along Harrison, overall it looks like a giant block of concrete.

It raises an interesting question in my mind about which way a building in that location should face. In that rendering, it's facing west. But should it look toward the FiDi? Or perhaps toward the south assuming the Potrero/101 viewpoint is the most seen/photographed? Personally, I think this is a location where you wouldn't really want it to appear to face a particular direction because it sits at the southern end of the skyline and will be highly visible from every direction, including east with Bay Bridge traffic.

Anyway, cool find wakamesalad.

[peanut gallery]

City Place was only mostly dead. According to the SF Business Times (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/morning_call/2012/06/cypress-carlyle-pounce-on-cityplace.html):

Cypress, Carlyle pounce on CityPlace
San Francisco Business Times
Date: Friday, June 8, 2012, 7:14am PDT

J.C. Penney is poised to set up shop in the Mid-Market neighborhood as the anchor tenant in a big development that could finally revive the long-depressed block between Fifth and Sixth streets.

Cypress Equities and global asset management firm the Carlyle Group are in contract to purchase the fully-entitled CityPlace project, a stretch of boarded-up buildings on the 900 block of Market Street that has city approvals for 260,000 square feet of retail development. The project, designed by Gensler, would include five floors of retail.

This is fantastic news!

[peanut gallery]

Aaaand in other mid-market news, Avalon Bay will start on 55 Ninth St. in July according to the SF Business Times (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/morning_call/2012/06/cypress-carlyle-pounce-on-cityplace.html):

AvalonBay plans Mid-Market rentals for Gen Y tenants
San Francisco Business Times by J.K. Dineen, Reporter
Date: Friday, June 8, 2012, 3:00am PDT

AvalonBay has completed its acquisition of 55 Ninth St., and will start construction in July on a $125 million development that will add 273 apartments to the rapidly growing neighborhood.

The project, right across the street from the new Twitter headquarters at 1355 Market St., will be different than AvalonBay’s Mission Bay projects in that it will be an AVA community, a new brand the company started to appeal to the sort of Gen Y renters who populate the offices of Twitter and other growing San Francisco tech companies.

Another long-standing hole in the ground bites the dust. This is becoming surreal.

PS: no worries on cluttering the thread, viewguy, now some other schmuck is doing it. ;)

[1977]

City Place was only mostly dead. According to the SF Business Times (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/morning_call/2012/06/cypress-carlyle-pounce-on-cityplace.html):



This is fantastic news!

Agreed! This will be a huge boon for mid-Market. With this and the other projects (Trinity, Twitter, 10th&Market, etc.) to the west, it looks like a better Market Street is slowly book ending the blight.

Wow, and now 55 Ninth! Thanks pg!

[mt_climber13]

It's about time NY and Chicago had some company on the Construction forum!

[Gordo]

Wow, the City Place news is fantastic. In 3-4 years Market Street will be hardly recognizable from 5th St west all the way to the Castro...

[mt_climber13]

The new plaza at 303 Second looks pretty nice. Click here (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/06/kilroy-put-some-jazz-into-soma-plaza.html?s=image_gallery) for photos.


Source and article: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/06/kilroy-put-some-jazz-into-soma-plaza.html?page=all

I LOATHE that building more than any other building in Soma. A pure catastrophe if you ask me. :yuck:

[Jerry of San Fran]

Thanks for the update peanut gallery. As I have a view of the sand lot from my apartment I'll get the old camera ready! Lots with weeds are becoming extinct in the city!

[easy as pie]

the 9th street building have been ready to go for months now, just waiting on the investors to pull the trigger. the real questions there are 1) ground floor retail, which in that area i think is such a good idea as to be obvious; and 2) height, it just seems too low in its current incarnation. rise!

as for the cityplace news, i'll believe it what i see a group of people out front cutting the ribbon. i'm super pleased at the evolution of that project - especially the zero disruptions/modifications of the market street pedestrian experience (as opposed to earlier plans for a driveway right off market) - but i wonder that it doesn't make more sense to include some sort of residential component in such a fine location for a mixed-use building. my guess is that this looks very profitable on paper now that there's an anchor tenant and that people are reluctant to dive back into the entitlement waters, but from a pure urbanism perspective, the more non-social assistance folks we can cram into that area, the better the chances of neighborhood-servicing ancillary retail developing along market. ideally, development would serve to transition the hood from no-go zone at night to go zone, and that won't happen if we don't have a base of frontiersmen splitting the tl from the shady south of market.

[coyotetrickster]

the 9th street building have been ready to go for months now, just waiting on the investors to pull the trigger. the real questions there are 1) ground floor retail, which in that area i think is such a good idea as to be obvious; and 2) height, it just seems too low in its current incarnation. rise!

as for the cityplace news, i'll believe it what i see a group of people out front cutting the ribbon. i'm super pleased at the evolution of that project - especially the zero disruptions/modifications of the market street pedestrian experience (as opposed to earlier plans for a driveway right off market) - but i wonder that it doesn't make more sense to include some sort of residential component in such a fine location for a mixed-use building. my guess is that this looks very profitable on paper now that there's an anchor tenant and that people are reluctant to dive back into the entitlement waters, but from a pure urbanism perspective, the more non-social assistance folks we can cram into that area, the better the chances of neighborhood-servicing ancillary retail developing along market. ideally, development would serve to transition the hood from no-go zone at night to go zone, and that won't happen if we don't have a base of frontiersmen splitting the tl from the shady south of market.

Westfield and SF Center are profitable. It's the adjacent neighborhood that will accommodate the new residents. It's not like it's far to walk from Trinity and the Twitter zone

[easy as pie]

from today's chron article on cityplace:

Groundbreaking will depend on city permits, but "realistically starting construction early next year is a viable target for us," he said. He expects construction to take 24 months as it will involve demolishing buildings and creating underground parking.

"Perhaps in late 2014 we could get the first retailers open, but certainly by the first quarter of 2015," he said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/08/BUF11OV9D2.DTL

[colemonkee]

The PUC Building deserves it's own thread in the construction forum. What a great looking building!

And CityPlace looks promising, but it would be cool to see some color injected onto the sides of the escalators in the atrium. With all that light in there, it would really draw the eye into the entrance from the street, and hopefully with it, some shoppers.

[viewguysf]

The PUC Building deserves it's own thread in the construction forum. What a great looking building!

Here are some photos I took of the PUC building last night.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7214/7171800211_a87975eaa3_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7171800211/)
San Francisco PUC Building (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7171800211/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7242/7357021110_e4b328356a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7357021110/)
San Francisco PUC Building - finishing construction (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7357021110/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

[easy as pie]

no point in giving the building its own thread, considering it's 98% completed. but the point remains that they did a good job, can't wait to see the green wall go up.

[timbad]

Wow, the City Place news is fantastic. In 3-4 years Market Street will be hardly recognizable from 5th St west all the way to the Castro...

sfgate had a good article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/10/MNNV1OT6BE.DTL) on Mid-Market today. interesting to me was this:

construction should begin in August on a boutique hotel and youth hostel in the historic Grant Building at 1095 Market St.
(7th and Market)

I'd been eagerly awaiting news on this one (and apparently I am not the only one (http://sf.curbed.com/places/grant-building)!). mid-Market has a bunch of buildings with character, and this is one of them. at least as much as for new development, I am rooting for these older buildings to be spiffy'd up and/or brought back to life

[northbay]

The PUC looks very sleek indeed.

[tech12]

Yeah the PUC building looks pretty good.

And it looks like the NIMBY battle against 8 Washington is NOT over yet, despite the building being approved already :rolleyes::

Voters might settle fight over condos
By: Joshua Sabatini | 06/10/12 5:50 PM
SF Examiner Staff Writer

The battle over a luxury 134-condo development at 8 Washington appears to be headed to the November ballot.

The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday is expected to approve the Simon Snellgrove of Pacific Waterfront Partners development despite opposition from more left-leaning political factions and members of the Golden Gateway Tennis and Swim Club, which would be displaced. Approval, however, won’t stop opponents from fighting.

“We’re not done,” said longtime land-use attorney Sue Hestor, who is fighting the project on behalf of Friends of Golden Gateway. “Simon Snellgrove is going to have to put some more of his money up.”

On June 21, the group is hosting an 8 Washington referendum fundraiser for the November ballot, when it will ask voters to reject height increases along The Embarcadero. The 130-foot-tall development would exceed the existing 84-foot height limit.

Supporters of 8 Washington questioned the aims of the ballot effort.

“So now we are going to go to the ballot to protect a private tennis club? That would seem to be a perversion of our system,” said development spokesman PJ Johnston, adding that the proposal “has been dragged out for seven years” and has passed “fair and square” with the approving bodies.

“This is a case of NIMBYs protecting their private tennis club,” he said.

An appeal last month of the development’s environmental impact report was rejected by supervisors, with David Campos, John Avalos and board President David Chiu the only ones to support it. The development is in Chiu’s district.

Last week, Supervisor Jane Kim obtained more concessions from the developer, including low-income youth access to the pool, a decrease in parking spaces from 250 to 200 and a 50-cent surcharge on parking for area transit improvements. The deal also calls for a $11 million contribution to The City’s affordable-housing trust fund,
$2 million more than required.

Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2012/06/voters-might-settle-fight-over-condos#ixzz1xV25vC3h

Go rebuild your precious tennis club somewhere more appropriate than downtown/the embarcadero, and let the city progress as it should, you dumb, selfish, NIMBYs. 130 feet isn't even that tall, and wouldn't even block anyone's views of the Bay or downtown, as it's bordered to the south and west by far taller buildings (and to the east by nothing but water, of course), and there's no nearby parks it can shadow, so it's obvious that the height isn't the real issue that the NIMBYs have, but rather just an excuse to oppose the building that they can latch onto, seeing as the current height limit for the area is 84 feet. All they seem to really want is to keep their tennis club, and to ensure there's no additional traffic to inconvenience them (as if 134 new units is going to make any difference in an area with tens of thousands of residents already...and even if it would, so what? This is a big city, you stupid NIMBYs :mad: ).

Nothing like NIMBY BS to get me ranting in the morning, lol.

[easy as pie]

i was afraid it would happen - they're energized by the coit tower measure's victory. seriously, in a fantasy we could run a ballot initiative that would outlaw this sort of harassment.

that said, good for jane kim in extracting even more for the city. that's something.

[mt_climber13]

Yeah the PUC building looks pretty good.

And it looks like the NIMBY battle against 8 Washington is NOT over yet, despite the building being approved already :rolleyes::



Go rebuild your precious tennis club somewhere more appropriate than downtown/the embarcadero, and let the city progress as it should, you dumb, selfish, NIMBYs. 130 feet isn't even that tall, and wouldn't even block anyone's views of the Bay or downtown, as it's bordered to the south and west by far taller buildings (and to the east by nothing but water, of course), and there's no nearby parks it can shadow, so it's obvious that the height isn't the real issue that the NIMBYs have, but rather just an excuse to oppose the building that they can latch onto, seeing as the current height limit for the area is 84 feet. All they seem to really want is to keep their tennis club, and to ensure there's no additional traffic to inconvenience them (as if 134 new units is going to make any difference in an area with tens of thousands of residents already...and even if it would, so what? This is a big city, you stupid NIMBYs :mad: ).

Nothing like NIMBY BS to get me ranting in the morning, lol.

My response to this includes a lot of inappropriate words like fucking, assholes, and shitheads, so I will withstand.

[mt_climber13]

One good thing that could come out of a ballot initiative to reduce height limits on Embarcadero is that it could be a referendum on the city's attitude towards height. It will be a barometer of change- are we still the same anti- growth city of the 1980s, or are we a more modern, sophisticated, 21st century city optimistic about growing our economy and skyline.

I have faith that the latter will prevail. People just do not seem to be so afraid of height anymore, and a lot of those who are don't even live inside city limits anyway.

[easy as pie]

well, a ballot initiative along those lines would be a way of waking up some developers to the threat of further legislated nimbyism, so it could be that they napalm the initiative and we all live happily ever after.

but i'm not so sure. think about all the people in the neighborhoods who'll see a vote on embarcadero height limits as a referendum on infill in their own areas. i could see an entire campaign along the lines of "keep san francisco san francisco" changing the course of history all so that these clowns can keep their street parking and tennis courts. the developer should make it clear to everyone, george lucas-style, that if 8 washington goes down, he's going to raze the lot to gravel and invite the city's homeless to make a tent city there.

anyway, if i were this dude with 8 wash, i'd get started as soon as possible and then hope that there's no retroactive clause to the legislation.

[1977]

524 Howard was sold to an affiliate of Crescent Heights. They seem to be pretty bullish on SF lately.

SOLD: 524 Howard St., San Francisco

JUNE 13, 2012 by PUBLISHER in NEWS RELEASES

Howard/First Property LLC, an affiliate of Crescent Heights Group of Properties based in Miami, acquired the high-rise residential development site at 524 Howard Street. Located directly adjacent to the future Transbay Transit Center, 524 Howard Street is a rare urban infill residential development site within San Francisco’s business core.
http://news.theregistrysf.com/sold-524-howard-st-san-francisco/

[tech12]

524 Howard was sold to an affiliate of Crescent Heights. They seem to be pretty bullish on SF lately.


http://news.theregistrysf.com/sold-524-howard-st-san-francisco/

Nice! Looks like that site is zoned for 450'.

[easy as pie]

that's fantastic news! and if they go rental again (seems awfully likely, given the market), imagine what they could pull in for these suites, that'd be like a $700-800 million addition to their portfolio for likely something close to a $400 million investment. i just wish that other majors would recognize the value in sf right now and get moving on some of these sites.

[1977]

John King's review of the new PUC building:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/17/BA4S1P2A9P.DTL

Nothing we weren't aware of, but here's a Chronicle article about all of the new developments in upper Market:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/17/BUD41P2NI8.DTL

[jbm]

Thanks for the articles. The upper market piece didn't even mention 1600 market, which i seem to recall is supposedly getting started soon (though no signs of it yet).

Relatedly, does anyone know what the story is with the building on the corner of market and gough, where Cafe Trieste was. It just closed and their website said it was due to change in building ownership. It also appears that the church that operated out of that building is no longer there.

[RST500]

Caffe Trieste is in North Beach.

[1977]

Caffe Trieste is in North Beach.

There was one on Market as well.

http://www.yelp.com/biz/caffe-trieste-san-francisco-4

[CyberEric]

I am all for most of these Upper Market projects, very exciting stuff in a good area to live, but I hope they don't allow a Starbucks to open on Sanchez. Sorry to be all NIMBY but I think we can do better.

[timbad]

looking down (north-northwest along) Fremont from Harrison, there was equipment (inactive on Saturday) which seemed to have been doing a little prepping recently...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8002/7201660078_66ed122d6c_b.jpg

... and the two buildings that remained after all the others were cleared a couple of years ago had (new) demolition permit notices on them, so they may not be long for this world (the ones in the shadow of doom on the right). edit: maybe making room for 333 Fremont:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7222/7201677642_09ab794903_b.jpg



two shots from similar vantage points show that the buildings have since met their fate:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5071/7399432900_3445e067ab_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5115/7399439660_420aa9ee94_b.jpg

and there is some pretty insistent excavation going on:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5322/7399448838_994107487c_b.jpg

[mt_climber13]

Taken earlier today:

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/9da06bcc.jpg

[1977]

Love the photo updates. Thanks timbad & wakamesalad!

[mt_climber13]

SFMOMA tower to break ground June 2013.
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2012/01/03/dd-place04_ph2_SFC0021715418.jpg
SFGate (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/19/DDQS1P2UAJ.DTL)

One Rincon Hill Tower 2, Crescent Heights, Trinity Place, SFMOMA, 375 Fremont, 181 Fremont, 45 Lansing, and, of course, Transbay Tower, all will be (as planned) under construction next summer. Gotta look good for America's Cup :tup:

[easy as pie]

no photo, but the site next to the center (on market right at octavia) is back in action, with multiple excavation machines of various types and a crane all active. at this pace, we should probably anticipate that one reaching grade ~october.
http://i.imgur.com/kyC9F.jpg
ugly as texas, but a lot of units over a beautifully unbroken retail wall on market street (i think the center's meeting space in on the second floor), so i won't complain. once everything in the pipes is built out, we're just a dozen or so key pieces away from a commercial wall from castro station all the way to the ferry building.

[peanut gallery]

One Rincon Hill Tower 2, Crescent Heights, Trinity Place, SFMOMA, 375 Fremont, 181 Fremont, 45 Lansing, and, of course, Transbay Tower, all will be (as planned) under construction next summer. Gotta look good for America's Cup :tup:

Don't forget 350 Mission (which should at least be at the excavation stage by then) and 222 Second. I haven't heard anything, but with office demand as it is I keep expecting (hoping!) to hear 535 Mission come back to life one of these days.

[easy as pie]

well, i snapped a pic of the center-adjacent market street site (rendering above) on saturday, forgot about that:
http://i.imgur.com/P2F4C.jpg?1

here's the franklin street senior housing as of the same day:
http://i.imgur.com/ILGXQ.jpg?1

and a pair of 1465 pine street from a week or so ago. i think the cladding is done, as the entire front façade is now behind a painters' scaffolding.
http://i.imgur.com/DdWyf.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/jOAlb.jpg

[peanut gallery]

Nice! Thanks for the updates!

[mt_climber13]

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/969cedb0.jpg

http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/h446/walamesalad/6528e61f.jpg

[1977]

Thanks for the updates everyone. Looking good!

[jamesinclair]

Hoping someone here had some quick advice.

Going to Warped Tour this Saturday at the AT&T Park Parking Lot A. Coming from Fresno, so a car is included. Whats the best place to park? BART may be too much of a hassle, Im thinking somewhere along the T?

[peanut gallery]

Back in May, I posted information on the city's expansion plans for Moscone (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=5690383&postcount=3574). It looks like SOM has been selected to design the expansion. From the SF Business Times (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/morning_call/2012/06/som-and-cavagnero-tapped-for-moscone.html):

SOM and Cavagnero tapped for Moscone
San Francisco Business Times
Date: Friday, June 22, 2012, 7:19am PDT

Architects Skidmore Owings & Merrill and Mark Cavagnero Associates have been picked to design the expansion of San Francisco’s Moscone Center, an estimated $500 million project tourism boosters hope will allow the city to remain competitive in attracting and retaining conventions.

SOM and Cavagnero beat out a competitive group of bidders that included HOK, Gensler and AECOM.

Jeffrey Birdwell of Sares Regis Group, which is overseeing the architectural design and engineering of an expansion, said SOM and Cavagnero “rose to the top of the pack” because of both experience and “conceptual ideas that were intriguing.”

I can't wait to see what they come up with.

[peanut gallery]

minesweeper posted a link to this article (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/06/22/office-developers-scour-for-more.html?page=all) in the 222 Second St thread, but the subject matter is so wide-sweeping and promising for large-scale office development in the city that I think we should discuss it here as well. Basically, office space is in such high demand that everything that could be renovated has been (or is in process) and the only option left is new construction.

There's so much here that I almost don't know where to start. I'm perhaps most excited about the mention of 535 Mission. JK Dineen, who most definitely knows his stuff, believes it will be the next office project to start (re-start actually). He also mentions a more specific start "date" for Transbay: next summer.

I'd post an excerpt, but it's all so encouraging you should just click over (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/06/22/office-developers-scour-for-more.html?page=all) and read the whole thing. Hard to believe there could be many more cranes filling the skies in the coming months (especially considering how many are already in action). And keep in mind, this doesn't even touch on what's happening on Rincon Hill, which is all residential.

[viewguysf]

Thanks peanut! I really want to see 535 Mission restarted! I think it's the small floor plates that could be the problem now since that's not what is typically in demand.

[minesweeper]

Construction update 15th and Mission mixed use development

All that wood framing sadly makes me think of the development that burned down near the West Oakland BART station. Hopefully there are no problems constructing that one.

Also it's great to see that this building won't remain empty for too long:

At 1275 Market St., TMG Partners and Divco West are planning a renovation of a 350,000-square-foot 1974 building that was left vacant when California State Compensation Insurance Fund moved hundreds of jobs out of the city.

[easy as pie]

well, given the timeline fitting a sept completion (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/06/22/mid-market-flooded-with-new-investment.html?page=all), 1275 market won't be getting a reclad, which is a real shame. i wonder at the 1 ninth street though, market's not a selling point?

[rriojas71]

Hoping someone here had some quick advice.

Going to Warped Tour this Saturday at the AT&T Park Parking Lot A. Coming from Fresno, so a car is included. Whats the best place to park? BART may be too much of a hassle, Im thinking somewhere along the T?

Parking somewhere along the T would be ok, but I think many people are going to have the same idea. Plus the T can be just as much hassle if not more than BART. Plus, the further south you go down the line, the shadier the areas become.

If I were you I would park at Daly City or Colma Bart, maybe San Bruno and come in that way. You can then catch the T or N towards Caltrain/Mission Bay or walk from BART.

Hope that helps.

[Jerry of San Fran]

I could not figure out why windows on the west side of the building were taken out till I witnessed beans being delivered through them. The building is getting a seismic upgrade. I hate to see it as it will make for an ugly sight, but apparently there is some danger for a collapse that makes the addition necessary. You can see some of the beams already installed on the lower floors.

I watched this building being built & like it very much. It has a wonderful pink glow at sunset when the sunset light bathes the pink & gray granit. As you can see it is the center of my view.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7111/7422558226_c52f824af6_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/7422558226/)

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7136/7422546750_1ba58898f6_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/7422546750/)

[homebucket]

Hoping someone here had some quick advice.

Going to Warped Tour this Saturday at the AT&T Park Parking Lot A. Coming from Fresno, so a car is included. Whats the best place to park? BART may be too much of a hassle, Im thinking somewhere along the T?

I would park at the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station and BART to Embarcadero station. From there, it's a 20 minute walk along the Embarcadero to AT&T Park. This way you'll save 2+ hours of driving time and get to enjoy beautiful views of the Bay!

[mt_climber13]

I would park at the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station and BART to Embarcadero station. From there, it's a 20 minute walk along the Embarcadero to AT&T Park. This way you'll save 2+ hours of driving time and get to enjoy beautiful views of the Bay!

Please, stop! Send him a private message, driving directions is not what these forums are for.

[easy as pie]

hard to tell from the images posted by jerry there, but are the black-tinted windows being replaced with another color? see, like for me, that would be a major improvement.

[peanut gallery]

^I can't say for sure, but it looks to me like they are just removing some panels for easier access. It doesn't look like wholesale changing of the glass.

[Jerry of San Fran]

1275 Market St. @ 9th remodel - the windows are not being replaced. One window on each floor on the west side has been removed so that the seismic beams can be moved in as the elevators cannot accomodate them.

[Jerry of San Fran]

I was by 1844 Market Friday (06/22) and it looks like the foundation hole is finished. A bull dozer was being lifted out of the hole as I took the pictures. The last I read is 116 units to be built here. If you look carefully you can see the serpintine rock base on one side.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7130/7424493730_90a6b309ac_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/7424493730/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8001/7424493866_06cfc61c92.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/7424493866/)

[peanut gallery]

That's a big hole! Thanks for the shots, Jerry.

[peanut gallery]

Color me disappointed. Former Central Freeway parcel P in Hayes Valley was originally controlled by Build Inc, who had a plan to break the large block into smaller buildings. They were going to hire multiple architects to design each, giving the block the look of a series of buildings that naturally developed over time like the surrounding neighborhood. Well, they sold their development rights to Avalon Bay who decided to go in another direction: one massive building.

To pull a quote from Avalon that was posted on Socketsite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/06/the_plans_for_parcel_p_hayes_valley_farm_about_to_get_t.html):

While the Project would consist of a single structure, the building would be articulated as a series of different forms and dwelling unit types, with varying architectural expression across the site.

This is the result:
http://www.socketsite.com/Parcel%20P%20Rendering%20-%20Elevation-thumb.jpg
Source: Socketsite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/06/the_plans_for_parcel_p_hayes_valley_farm_about_to_get_t.html)

Yeah, I'm not seeing that. Sure there's a change in articulation -- which is repeated all along the development. That doesn't give me a sense of "varying architectural expression."

I was really excited about this project under Build's original vision. Now, it's just another monolithic development that isn't horrible but certainly is nothing to get excited about aside from the increased density it will bring. Speaking of which, even that isn't very exciting according to many commenters at Socketsite. They wished for more.

[easy as pie]

^major fail. this thing dropped nearly 100 units from its last iteration, which wasn't even particularly intensive (with the "mews" or long interior courtyards). and wtf is up with the townhome style walk-up? this site should be treated like the gough and franklin sites, give me a break. where's the grade-level commercial along laguna? you're building on a MAJOR east/west artery, don't underbuild to preempt neighborhood opposition to a project ON THE SITE OF A FORMER FREEWAY RAMP!

[mt_climber13]

Low density developments are no longer San Francisco's forte. All of the excitement is now in mid rise and high rise structures. I don't recall ever being thrilled by the plethora of non controversial 3 story designs that litter the landscape. However, when I think of the de Young, MOMA, Trinity Place, Federal Building, Buchanan and Market, One Rincon Hill, Millennium Tower, Transbay Tower, 181 Fremont, and 555 Washington (RIP), I realize that we are truly becoming a more cosmopolitan high density city of world class architecture (at least east of Divisadero).

[mt_climber13]

San Franciscans are not the only NIMBYs in the country. Although we definitely have a good sized share, I wanted to share with you some classical NIMBYism from New Yorkers, taken from the New York Times article about 4 WTC:

"masayaNYCNYC, NY
FLAG
Sorry, but as emotional a symbol the original buildings were, they were in no way "beautiful twin towers." They were pretty hideous, light-sucking and awkward monstrosities, aesthetically-speaking. They did nothing more than announce their size over all. Beyond that, their aesthetic contribution to a historical neighborhood was tin-eared and negative."

"MNew York, NY
FLAG
Anyone think about the number of birds that are going to slam into that building?"

"e2oneofakindSomers, ny
FLAG
what would you give to see some low and grounded buildings in NYC? I'm wishing someone would come up with an architectural plan that is not intended for the gods. How refreshing that would be. We'd get back our light, the birds, the plantings and most of all, intimacy and community. I think we've lost our humanity. I' m sort of sick of this stuff."

Now, if this type of complaining is coming from a city that is one of the tallest in the world, I don't feel so bad having to put up with deadweight in this city :haha:

[minesweeper]

A pair of WSJ articles about SF just dropped:

Tech Boom Hits San Francisco Rental Prices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303296604577450760765114108.html)
Prices Soar as Well-Paid Tech Workers Stream Into City After a Long Exodus
By SHIRA OVIDE, June 25, 2012

SAN FRANCISCO—The latest technology boom is helping to stem a decadelong exodus of residents from San Francisco, but the influx of well-paid workers is driving up already-high housing costs and straining public resources.

The promise and perils of the boom are evident in the experience of Genevieve Sheehan and her husband, who are relocating from the Boston area for her new job at social-games maker Zynga Inc. They have endured a grinding hunt for a home.

Ms. Sheehan, a 29-year-old recent Harvard Business School graduate, said open houses were "a zoo." The couple was forced to boost their rental budget 40% to $3,500 a month before they landed a two-bedroom apartment. "A lot of people want to live here and are willing and able to pay incredibly high prices" to do so, Ms. Sheehan said.

Chinese in Talks to Fund U.S. Homes (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304458604577489062449154168.html)
State Bank in Talks to Provide Lennar $1.7 Billion for Two Long-Stalled Projects
By DINNY MCMAHON and ROBBIE WHELAN, June 25, 2012

Lennar Corp., one of the U.S.'s largest home builders, is in talks with the China Development Bank for approximately $1.7 billion in capital to jump-start two long-delayed San Francisco projects that would transform two former naval bases into large-scale housing developments, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The negotiations aren't final and the financing arrangement could still fall through. But if completed, the deal would reflect a changing dynamic between the U.S. and Chinese economies, as an American company turns to China for help funding a long-delayed and partially publicly funded project that otherwise wouldn't get done.

The developments, Treasure Island and Hunters Point Shipyard, also have the potential to alter San Francisco's housing market by providing nearly 20,000 new homes, a sports arena and millions of square feet of office and retail space in a market that is land-constrained and has had limited new construction. The city has committed hundreds of millions of dollars, in the form of tax-increment bonds, to the projects, which in total are expected to cost $10.5 billion over the next few decades.

[easy as pie]

in any normal case, the lennar plans coming to fruition would be like a nuclear weapon on sf home prices and development, which can't happen soon enough. except that, as the vancouver and toronto examples demonstrate to a fine point, chinese capital means orientation toward a chinese speculative market on the sales side. which real estaters, developers and pro-growth fanatics (like us) would love, but this has been shown - again, in vancouver and toronto - actually to have an inflationary effect on unit prices.

so narrowly speaking, this is the sort of development we should cheer and our mayor should make an appearance to celebrate and that. but narrowly speaking, it does very very little to address the very real affordability issues that we have. one of my favorite arguments in favor of better urban form is that we oughtn't build our towns for the suburbans who come here to work and then leave in the eves, surely it's far worse to have foreign investers' apartments sitting empty in the bayview price our school teachers and carpenters out of the city.

[1977]

Some more info about the the 5M project (http://www.5mproject.com) at Fifth and Mission (Chronicle building and immediate surroundings). IMO, this project has a lot of potential and should really activate the area around Fifth at Minna, Mission, and Howard.

http://news.theregistrysf.com/seeking-serendipity-5th-mission/

http://www.5mproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/intro-slide_final2.jpg
Source: www.5mproject.com

http://www.5mproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/principle_web_2_civic_pulse.gif
Source: www.5mproject.com

http://www.5mproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/principle_web_3_accessible_pulse.gif
Source: www.5mproject.com

[CyberEric]

A pair of WSJ articles about SF just dropped:

Regarding the first article, I remember a few years ago the media were running stories about how SF was losing all its jobs, that there was an exedus of workers and so forth. Now the articles are about how all the jobs are driving prices sky high.
I have been away from the city for a few months, can someone tell me what is going on? If I were to believe the media, I'm going to have to pay 1k more when I move back to the city I love.

[coyotetrickster]

Regarding the first article, I remember a few years ago the media were running stories about how SF was losing all its jobs, that there was an exedus of workers and so forth. Now the articles are about how all the jobs are driving prices sky high.
I have been away from the city for a few months, can someone tell me what is going on? If I were to believe the media, I'm going to have to pay 1k more when I move back to the city I love.

There's this funny thing called change. The media doesn't make, but rather reports on it. In the economic downturn, yes, jobs were leaving, along with the people who lost those jobs and didn't want to empty their wallets waiting for other jobs. Now, jobs are back in certain industries and the people with those jobs need to live someplace...

[Gordo]

^The article does say "decadelong" exodus of residents, and I'm not sure where exactly that decade would have been...2010 census numbers were higher than 2000 - is the implication that there was some kind of high hit in 2001 and then a continual drop to 2011, before ramping up again?

[minesweeper]

I have been away from the city for a few months, can someone tell me what is going on? If I were to believe the media, I'm going to have to pay 1k more when I move back to the city I love.

Anecdotally, I think the reports are correct, and you'll probably have to pay 20-50% more than just a couple of years ago (at least for the northeast quadrant of the city). One of my coworkers looking to move to the city said an open house in Lower Pac Heights was "crazy".

^The article does say "decadelong" exodus of residents, and I'm not sure where exactly that decade would have been...2010 census numbers were higher than 2000 - is the implication that there was some kind of high hit in 2001 and then a continual drop to 2011, before ramping up again?

Yeah, that was some unusual wording, and it seems to be pandering a bit to the typical WSJ reader's impression of California. The author is referring only to domestic migration:

During the decade that ended in 2010, an average of 9,000 people a year left San Francisco for other parts of the U.S., according to California's Department of Finance. The city of roughly 800,000 continued to grow due to immigration from abroad.

[ElDuderino]

Dolby to move HQ to Mid-Market
Casey Newton
Published 01:43 p.m., Tuesday, June 26, 2012

(06-26) 13:41 PDT San Francisco -- Dolby Laboratories will move its headquarters to the Mid-Market neighborhood, continuing the transformation of a neighborhood that is becoming a new technology hub.

The audio technology provider said Tuesday that it plans to purchase the building at 1275 Market St. from DivcoWest. The purchase price is $110 million.

The building, which sits a few hundred feet from the new Twitter headquarters near 9th and Market streets, was formerly occupied by the State Compensation Insurance Fund. DivcoWest and TMG Partners acquired the 354,000-square-foot building from the fund in October for $44 million, according to the San Francisco Business Times.

Dolby, which has about 700 Bay Area employees working in three San Francisco offices, will consolidate most of its operations into the new headquarters, CEO Kevin Yeaman said. Its current headquarters at 100 Potrero Ave. will continue be used as a sales office, he said.

The company is making the move despite the fact it is not receiving financial incentives from the city. Although its new headquarters sits close to the Mid-Market area where companies are eligible for a temporary exemption from the city's payroll tax, the site lies a bit outside of it.

"We're actually excited to be a part of the Mid-Market area," Yeaman said. "There are a lot of exciting things going on there. It's an opportunity to get in on the ground floor of a very exciting neighborhood."

In addition to Twitter, technology companies that have moved into the area recently include ZenDesk, Zoosk, One King's Lane and CallSocket.

"They're going to be adding to our whole strategy around Market Street," Mayor Ed Lee said. "They're a good San Francisco company. They mean to grow here and be here for the long term."

The building will be renovated before employees start moving in, likely some time in the next year to 18 months, city officials said. Yeaman said renovation plans are still in the early design phase.

Founded by Ray Dolby in Great Britain in 1965, the company moved to San Francisco in 1976. Its products include surround-sound systems and technology that encodes and compresses audio.

"We are excited about Dolby Laboratories' continuing and growing presence in the city and its contribution to revitalizing the Mid-Market area," Dolby said in a statement.

http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/Dolby-to-move-HQ-to-Mid-Market-3664405.php

[1977]

:previous: That's awesome news! Thanks ElDuderino.

[minesweeper]

Wow, bought for $44 million in October, and sold for $110 million nine months later. Even if you assume $10 million for the retrofit, that's a very handsome profit.

It's quite telling that any large chunks of office space aren't remaining on the market very long.

[ElDuderino]

New SFO control tower will have a torch-like air
John King
Updated 08:56 a.m., Wednesday, June 27, 2012

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/7273/628x471x.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/708/628x471x.jpg/)

As the new control tower at San Francisco International Airport takes shape during the next two years, keep this simple phrase in mind: Flair follows function.

The end result will be a 221-foot aluminum-clad tower that's narrow at the base but slides out to the east as it rises, as though craning its neck for a view. At the summit an all-glass crown will pull back and pop up, the see-through finale to the show.

It has the makings of a stylized torch amid SFO's low horseshoe of domestic terminals, at least if reality matches the architectural renderings. But the designers and airport officials call the design a pragmatic response to the challenge at hand - squeezing into a narrow site between two terminals while crafting a perch where air traffic controllers can survey every nook and cranny below.

"We worked hard to keep the tower on a diet," said Alejandro Ogata, an architect with HNTB, the tower's design firm. "All the activities need to be at the top of the building, but nobody wanted a lollipop on a stick."

The $102 million project kicks off Thursday with a ceremony that will include Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood. The clearing of the site between Terminals 1 and 2 will be followed by the construction of a facility that should be completed in the fall of 2014. The Federal Aviation Administration will spend another year installing the navigation control equipment.

As might be expected, a tower of this nature is shaped by a multitude of demands. For starters, the FAA requires that SFO's be strong enough to withstand a magnitude 8 earthquake - larger than the 1906 temblor - and promptly resume operations. But it's not allowed to sway in high winds, lest a traffic controller be hit by airsickness.

The height and the upper floor's precise location are determined by the need to have a clear line of sight to all of the airport's critical runways and gates. Lightning protection cables will radiate down from rooftop antennas.

When the decision was made, for seismic reasons, to replace the current tower, which sits atop a 1950s block of offices at the north end of Terminal 2, SFO had to find a place within its existing buildings to insert a new one. That's not the case at most airports, which have enough land to set the control tower away from the terminals.

The one semi-convenient space proved to be a tight square now used mostly for docking and parking. At the same time, the compact dimensions required that the lower neck of the tower be as narrow as possible, since room was needed for a pair of corridors between Terminals 1 and 2, one for general visitors and one for passengers who already had passed through security.

Working within these constraints - and given a site that will be far more prominent from the Bayshore Freeway than the current control tower - the architects sought to enliven the tower without exceeding the budget set beforehand by the FAA, which will pay $69 million of the cost, with the balance covered by the airport.

The tower is shaped as though the aluminum-clad form unfurls from a central trunk of translucent glass; the trunk faces the traffic ramps inside the horseshoe and will glow at night. The base will be clear glass, an atrium-like space with the aluminum panels of the tower beginning their climb at the rear, another way of accenting the height.

The faux-atrium is where the nonsecure corridor will be, along with plants and seating and public art along the way.

"These projects are civic in nature," Ogata explained. "You want to strike a balance between (employee) safety and openness."

On the south edge of the base will be the most public gesture of all, a concession area to serve people waiting for incoming flights at Terminal 1. It's the first step in a planned upgrade to a structure that was built in the early 1960s and last remodeled in 1988 - more evidence that renovation work at SFO will never, ever truly come to an end.

More Pics: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/place/article/New-SFO-control-tower-will-have-a-torch-like-air-3664702.php
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[viewguysf]

More Pics:

The other renderings are intriguing and interesting too--this is a great upgrade for SFO!

[mt_climber13]

Hi everyone, unfortunately I am moving away from the city for a while :( Apparently I had one of those jobs that is not included in the "boom." I will be in Sacramento and coming back once a month. Hopefully I will move back the end of this year or next year. I hope you all take lots of pictures and keep us updated.

[viewguysf]

Here are some photos I took with my iPhone during a great Pride Celebration last Sunday--it was fun to hang and dance in the streets with the literally shimmering building above and behind us. What an improvement over the pitiful pink thing that used to occupy that lot!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7279/7464368438_06194db30b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7464368438/)
IMG_0804 - Version 2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7464368438/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8002/7464381932_996a4aa829_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7464381932/)
IMG_0805 - Version 2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7464381932/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickrhttp://farm9.staticflickr.com/8021/7464397738_bf85d9be25_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7464397738/)
IMG_0809 - Version 2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/7464397738/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

[1977]

Hi everyone, unfortunately I am moving away from the city for a while :( Apparently I had one of those jobs that is not included in the "boom." I will be in Sacramento and coming back once a month. Hopefully I will move back the end of this year or next year. I hope you all take lots of pictures and keep us updated.

Sorry to hear that wakamesalad. Best of luck on your next endeavor - hopefully, you get back here soon!

Great pics viewguysf!

[Jerry of San Fran]

When I read in the SF Chronicle that Dolby was buying 1275 Market ST. I nearly fell off of my chair! Good news. I look down on the building from the Fox Plaza. I had an interview with Dolby 26 years ago at their Potrero office which is quite nice.

Construction slated is to start in July next door to 1275 Market at 55 9th Street, a 17 story building. The area will be crawling with construction workers for a long time!

A friend asked the cement foreman at 10th & Market Sts. (Crescent Heights development) how hight the highest building will be & he said 40 stories. I get different heights from several sources. I think the decorative part of the top of the building is included by some. Also I'm surprised that it will be built with reinforced concrete in earthquake country.

[1977]

An overview of projects in the mid ("central") Market district:

http://www.oewd.org/media/docs/Central%20Market/CMCBD_DEV_finalq1.pdf